9.12: Environmental Racism

In addition to keeping specific groups of people residentially separated, ghettos seem to serve a variety of other unpleasant functions as well. Ghettos have been used for many years as dumping grounds for a variety of social ills and civic disamenities. For example, Chinatown regions across the West Coast hosted brothels, opium dens, and gambling houses – not because the Chinese embraced those activities any more than any other ethnic group, but because city leaders permitted/encouraged those activities, as long as they were in Chinatown. Rather than engendering pity for the Chinese that were left without protection from the law, the lack of police enforcement in these regions of the city reinforced negative stereotypes about Chinese people.

Ghettos are also frequently subject to industrial disamenities; health hazards not found elsewhere in the urban environment. Air, water, and ground pollutants are frequently worst in poor, minority neighborhoods leading to the evolution of what some call environmental racism. Historically, laundry activities were considered a nuisance – soap making was hot, dirty, and often foul-smelling, so “washhouses” were often confined to Chinese ghettos – giving rise to the institution of the Chinese Laundry. Many similar conditions exist today. Black and brown people in many cities suffer from higher rates of environmental health issues like asthma and obesity than non-Hispanic whites. These statistics may be caused partly by ethnic cultural practices and poverty, but it is also clear that poor minority people are least able to move away from polluted neighborhoods, most of which were established long before the Civil Rights era. Minority groups also have more trouble defending their right to a healthy neighborhood via political processes.

In addition to the obvious toxic pollutants, other environmental hazards in the form of things like payday lenders, fast food restaurants, loud traffic, and even poor disaster planning may undermine the ability of residents living in minority neighborhoods to live as long and as well as fellow citizens across town. For example, during Hurricane Katrina (2005), black residents of New Orleans were neglected by the city’s hurricane evacuation plan because the plan was designed to cater to people who owned automobiles. A significant percentage (100,000 people) of the city’s black population relied on public transport and were therefore not part of the city’s hurricane evacuation plan.

Positives

While many of the effects of ghettoization undermine the quality of life of minority groups, it must be noted that there are positive outcomes from ghettoization as well. This is not to justify the official and unofficial discriminatory practices (see the section below), but to argue instead that the spatial concentration of minorities creates situations that affected groups have leveraged to their advantage.

First, diversity is preserved via ghettoization, just as those who engineered these elements of cities hoped. By undermining the prospects of intermarriage and assimilation, excluded groups remain somewhat distinct from the host culture. If every minority group melted perfectly into the host culture, then everyone would be robbed of many of the magnificent cultural aspects of a diverse society. Large cities are exciting and enriching precisely because they have diversity. Certainly, lots of people enjoy the wide variety of ethnic foods in cities where ethnic identities remain strong, but there’s far more at risk should the distinctiveness of ethnic populations erode. Minority religious traditions, languages, philosophies, arts, and economic practices would all suffer if complete assimilation were to occur.

Other benefits may accrue to ethnic groups who remain near each other. Mutual support, in a variety of forms (economic, political, recreational, etc.) is easier when members of an ethnic cluster together. A reduction in some types of conflict may occur if people of like values and traditions are neighbors. Opinions regarding how late a party should go, or what a proper lawn should look like may vary less in neighborhoods where residents come from a common background. Recent immigrants, even those seeking to shed their ethnic heritage, often find ethnic enclaves easier places to begin the acculturation and assimilation process than a neighborhood dominated by the host culture group.

Ethnic minorities seeking to preserve their traditions and identities also stand a greater chance of exercising political power if they live together; concentrating voting power in specific areas. Many voting districts are gerrymandered to help promote (or deny) the interests of specific ethnicities. Even simple pleasures, like finding someone who also likes to play games, like dominoes or cricket; or finding a bakery that makes an ethnic-specialty food (e.g., pan de muerto, king cakes, laffa bread or knishes) is easier when people who share an ethnic identity clusterin space.

Figure 9-29: Los Angeles, CA - Immigrant Thais have creatively adapted this hot dog stand. The mish-mash of American and Thai influences points to the competing forces that challenge the immigrant assimilation process.